Autonomous buses still need the same road space that cars need, so they'll get stuck in traffic just like any other road vehicle.

Big cities aren't going to stop building rail transit just because road vehicles can drive themselves.

There's a difference between cars and busses in case you haven't noticed. Busses also have the advantage of being able to use any street and change routes dynamically.
People that think rail transit is the only way to go, need to get their head out of the clouds.

There's a difference between cars and busses in case you haven't noticed. Busses also have the advantage of being able to use any street and change routes dynamically.
People that think rail transit is the only way to go, need to get their head out of the clouds.

That's exactly it. Everyone has a hard on for rail transit because it's cool but people haven't been looking at all sides of things. Busses do a good job of moving people for less. People....especially people on this forum aren't used to thinking outside the box, only the box drawn by Dru Farrell.

That's exactly it. Everyone has a hard on for rail transit because it's cool but people haven't been looking at all sides of things. Busses do a good job of moving people for less. People....especially people on this forum aren't used to thinking outside the box, only the box drawn by Dru Farrell.

Even buses or kind of a waste, and I can attest that they are a pain in the ass to use. In 20 years everyone is going to be driving electric cars and it won’t matter.

That's exactly it. Everyone has a hard on for rail transit because it's cool but people haven't been looking at all sides of things. Busses do a good job of moving people for less. People....especially people on this forum aren't used to thinking outside the box, only the box drawn by Dru Farrell.

That feels off the mark. There's a history within these forums (perhaps more in the "Calgary Public Transit II" forum) of quoting/discussing Jarrett Walker, who (a) has a history of advocating for true BRT when appropriate, and (b) criticizing urbanists who want to make transit slow.

Edit: I think there's a good variety of opinions in here, let's keep it going and focus on the issues instead of personalities!

There's a difference between cars and busses in case you haven't noticed. Busses also have the advantage of being able to use any street and change routes dynamically.
People that think rail transit is the only way to go, need to get their head out of the clouds.

I'll quote myself:

Quote:

Originally Posted by milomilo

What would autonomous buses do that buses on Centre St can't do right now? Other than operate more cheaply? That is a big benefit, but capacity, speed, reliability will remain the same.

I think you need to get your head out the clouds, autonomous vehicles are not a panacea. We already have buses on Centre St, they're insufficient and that's why we're building the Green Line. Automating those buses will offer very little improvement on the situation, whereas rail will give big upgrades of capacity, speed and reliability.

There's a difference between cars and busses in case you haven't noticed. Busses also have the advantage of being able to use any street and change routes dynamically.
People that think rail transit is the only way to go, need to get their head out of the clouds.

Somebody better tell all those Chinese cities they didn't need to spend all that money on Metro systems. Buses could have solved their problem!

Or not. Simply compare a city like Jakarta (very little rail and absolutely horrendous traffic) to a city like Shanghai (world's largest Metro system and comparably far better traffic) to see the effect that good rail transit has. Shanghai's Metro carries over 10 million people per day - exactly how do you think that buses will be able to do anything close to that?

Even at a size more similar to Calgary, look at how horrible Dublin's traffic is (public transport system relies heavily on buses) to other cities of comparable size (for example, Copenhagen) on the European mainland that actually have decent rail networks.

Buses can NEVER match the capacity of rail - period. When a heavy rail line can have a capacity of over 30 000 people per hour in each direction (even a light rail line can do 10 000pph), there is absolutely no way buses can come even close to that.

__________________
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature." - Michael Faraday (1791-1867)

And yet the section of the Green Line route where bus capacity is a major issue isn't even going to get built in the first phase, nor has the city definitely stated that the second phase will be that section and there's no funding for it.

And yet the section of the Green Line route where bus capacity is a major issue isn't even going to get built in the first phase, nor has the city definitely stated that the second phase will be that section and there's no funding for it.

We've been down this strawman ...

Maintenance facility was the big issue. Regarding funding for the second phase, yeah not locked in yet, but that is not abnormal at all.

As a touchstone, someone may be considering purchasing a home with a 15 year mortgage. Do you say that you will not buy if you cannot guarantee you have a job in five years? No, you go ahead and purchase, with the understanding that prospects are reasonable for five years down even if not guaranteed.

These are potentially multi-decade projects, and no, we do not know where the funds will come from for X years down when phase two starts, but that is okay.

Maintenance facility was the big issue. Regarding funding for the second phase, yeah not locked in yet, but that is not abnormal at all.

Regardless of the maintenance facility, I'm just responding to the point of how rail is better than bus because of higher maximum capacity; but this advantage isn't being used in the Green Line as it stands today.

Quote:

As a touchstone, someone may be considering purchasing a home with a 15 year mortgage. Do you say that you will not buy if you cannot guarantee you have a job in five years? No, you go ahead and purchase, with the understanding that prospects are reasonable for five years down even if not guaranteed.

These are potentially multi-decade projects, and no, we do not know where the funds will come from for X years down when phase two starts, but that is okay.

But that's another failure from the city; we were supposed to know where the funding was coming from as the project was supposed to be nearly or completely funded. If the city had better estimates from the start, maybe instead of asking for $3B from the Federal and Provincial Government, it could have asked for $5B.

Regardless of the maintenance facility, I'm just responding to the point of how rail is better than bus because of higher maximum capacity; but this advantage isn't being used in the Green Line as it stands today.

How is it not being used by the green line as it stands today? The green line being planned has every bit as much capacity as the existing lines do - likely even more, since the 7th Ave portion is the bottleneck on the current lines - but there is no such bottleneck proposed for the green line.

How is it not being used by the green line as it stands today? The green line being planned has every bit as much capacity as the existing lines do - likely even more, since the 7th Ave portion is the bottleneck on the current lines - but there is no such bottleneck proposed for the green line.

I'm referring to the Green Line that is funded. It may have the capacity, but it's not being to used to great effect because Calgary Transit will still need to run the same 80+ buses/hour during peak hours down Centre Street. The same section of road always highlighted by the city as most in need of LRT capacity because it can't fit many more buses on it.

Sure, some people may be optimistic that the city will be able to get things in place to build the Centre Street section concurrently and have it ready by 2029, but I have to think that a lot of things have to go perfectly for that happen, including the city finding another $2-$3B, phase 1 staying on budget, Gondek getting the council to commit to the North ahead of Seton, and the city not seeing the issues the at-grade alignment has that this board has pointed out and then going back to the drawing board.

Am I correct in thinking that the Center street surface portion of the line is going to look/feel similar to the Valley Metro Rail in Phoenix?

I keep finding myself struggling with the fact that the low floor decision is being based on such a small part of phase 1.

Similar but worse. Most of that Phoenix line is in a wider ROW with space for 2 vehicle lanes in each direction. The only part of the Phoenix system that is equivalent is the section on South Terrace Road.

FWIW, their LRT has 49,000 daily passengers on 42km of line. Ours has 306,000 on 60km.

Forgive me if this has already been discussed, but will the chosen green line route utilize the roughed in station at city hall of not?

No, because:
1. it doesn't go close enough to city hall that this would have even made sense
2. there isn't really a roughed-in station as I understand it, but just tunnel extensions from current red line, including a large cavern for a hypothetical red line/blue line track crossover.

No, because:
1. it doesn't go close enough to city hall that this would have even made sense
2. there isn't really a roughed-in station as I understand it, but just tunnel extensions from current red line, including a large cavern for a hypothetical red line/blue line track crossover.

Thanks. Is it true that Banker's Hall roughed one in also?

__________________Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire

One thing I did notice that got lost in discussion - the station at 7th on the green line is actually situated north of 7th, between 6th-7th, rather than between 8th and 7th. Which is surprising and disappointing. It means any connection between the Green Line and future tunneled 8th Ave station will be longer/less good. Makes me suspicious that the City has no plans to ever tunnel the red line.